Jump to content

Pharmacist convicted in slaying of robber


Recommended Posts

OKLAHOMA CITY — A jury Thursday convicted an Oklahoma City pharmacist of first-degree murder, saying he went too far when he pumped six bullets into a teenager who tried to rob the drug store where he worked, and suggested he spend the rest of his life in prison.

 

Jerome Ersland, 59, had been hailed as a hero for protecting two co-workers during the May 19, 2009, robbery attempt.

 

Read more: http://www.kansas.com/2011/05/27/1866775/pharmacist-convicted-in-slaying.html#ixzz1Ni4vFuvT

 

 

I call bullshit, I mean come on, he should be guilty of SOMETHING but not first degree murder, I mean he was protecting his coworkers and his place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should also be noted that the jury could have convicted him of first degree manslaughter or abolish him of the charges.

 

He did not testify either.

 

Here's a link that sheds some light on the prosecutions case.

 

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmacists-supporters-seek-pardon-attorneys-begin-appeal/article/3572201

 

Also, here is the video of the shooting.

 

 

You never know what is going to happen, even if the kid is laying on the ground. He could have gotten up at any second.

Edited by EastCoastNiner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's one thing to defend yourself, it's another to reload and shoot a guy six times after he's already down. If he had just shot the guy 6 times in a row, he'd probably wouldn't have even been charged. But he shot, chased the other guy, walked back into the store, walked passed the guy on the ground, reloaded, and shoots the guy on the ground again 5 times. Tough to argue self defense in that case.

 

That said, no sympathy for that dumbass who got killed. Good. Wish he would have killed the other one.

 

Here's my thing: was the guy he shot dead after the first shot? If he was, how is it manslaughter? You can't commit manslaughter on a body that's already dead.

 

Personally, if I was a juror, I'd just clear him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean one shot may have been acceptable (not really) but to shoot the kid another 5 times is insane.

 

I do think the pharmicist does deserve some form of punishment considering that the moment he went to reload his pistol to shoot him another few times was when it wasn't considered self-defense anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he deserves any punishment at all. If anything, give the man an award. If you're a 16 year old punk trying to rob a pharmacy at gun point (well, the friend) you deserve to be dead. It's obvious you won't be positively contributing to society anyway so why not just gtfo.

 

I know some of you won't agree with this, but I think anyone that tries to pull that shit gets what they have coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he deserves any punishment at all. If anything, give the man an award. If you're a 16 year old punk trying to rob a pharmacy at gun point (well, the friend) you deserve to be dead. It's obvious you won't be positively contributing to society anyway so why not just gtfo.

 

I know some of you won't agree with this, but I think anyone that tries to pull that shit gets what they have coming.

 

 

Im not part of the some, trust me, if you come at me with a gun, you better kill me, because one if is us dying. He is guilty of being caught and thats about it.. Punk kid got what he deserved.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely wrong, absolutely. Death is hardly ever deserved by anyone. The kid was sixteen years old, SIXTEEN YEARS OLD, and he was unarmed. He made a huge error in judgment and paid for it with his life...it's messed up. I don't think he should have been convicted of murder in the first degree, but that was a murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely wrong, absolutely. Death is hardly ever deserved by anyone. The kid was sixteen years old, SIXTEEN YEARS OLD, and he was unarmed. He made a huge error in judgment and paid for it with his life...it's messed up. I don't think he should have been convicted of murder in the first degree, but that was a murder.

 

And, his age has what to do with anything? The owner didn't stand there and say, "Oh, you have a mask on, I think you look like you're 16 years old". He had absolutely no clue how old they were.

 

You have no clue what you would do in that situation. The kid was shot once in the head, and according to the reports, was still alive. People say the owner should have moved the gun away from the kid, and just called 911? How do you know the kid doesn't have another gun? How do you know the threat has been removed?

 

This guy did the right thing, and pumped those extra slugs into that little thug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This guy did the right thing, and pumped those extra slugs into that little thug.

If you actually believe that you have some serious issues bro. That was in humane to stand over a kid and shoot him 5 times...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you actually believe that you have some serious issues bro. That was in humane to stand over a kid and shoot him 5 times...

Not really... 2 minutes before that the kid was putting his life and his coworkers life in danger. It's probably best that it ended this way before the kid really did end up hurting someone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The kid was shot once in the head, and according to the reports, was still alive.

 

He was shot in the head, the threat was removed. No need to keep firing at him while he's down.

 

Anyway, I don't think the pharmacist should be convicted of first degree murder, but should be charged with something that requires a little jail time.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was shot in the head, the threat was removed. No need to keep firing at him while he's down.

 

Anyway, I don't think the pharmacist should be convicted of first degree murder, but should be charged with something that requires a little jail time.

 

How do you know the threat was removed? How do you know he didn't have another gun on him? How do you the kid couldn't get up and attack him? How do you know all of this?

 

It's easy for a lot of you fools to play Monday morning quarterback though.

Edited by EastCoastNiner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know the threat was removed?

 

Because a bullet was in his head and he was laying on the ground. If he feared the robber had another gun on him he could have searched him while he was laying on the ground bleeding from the hole in his skull.

 

And it's funny you mention the Monday morning quarterback thing when you weren't sitting in the trial 'nor have you read the depositions. Therefor, you are ill informed, and YOU, not me, came in here with such strong opinions on a case you are largely ignorant to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because a bullet was in his head and he was laying on the ground. If he feared the robber had another gun on him he could have searched him while he was laying on the ground bleeding from the hole in his skull.

 

And it's funny you mention the Monday morning quarterback thing when you weren't sitting in the trial 'nor have you read the depositions. Therefor, you are ill informed, and YOU, not me, came in here with such strong opinions on a case you are largely ignorant to.

 

Yes, because people who have been shot in the head have never gotten up before. :lol: . So, the pharmacist goes over to search him, and punk gets up and attacks him? What are you going to say then? Are you going to continue to play Monday morning quarterback, again?

 

 

Now, this case is not the same as the one I'm giving a link to, but the point remains the same. You never know what is going to happen.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Red_Wings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, because people who have been shot in the head have never gotten up before. :lol: . So, the pharmacist goes over to search him, and punk gets up and attacks him? What are you going to say then? Are you going to continue to play Monday morning quarterback, again?

 

 

Now, this case is not the same as the one I'm giving a link to, but the point remains the same. You never know what is going to happen.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Red_Wings

 

After the pharmacist shot the robber, he chased the other guy out of the store, walked past the wounded robber, reloaded his gun, then shot the dude to death...that goes way beyond simply defending yourself. The proper move would have been to run out of the store and call the cops while the man was incapacitated on the floor with a bullet in his brain. There was no threat after the first shot, and the pharmacist himself proved that as he walked by him and took time to reload the gun before firing off.

 

And no, that case isn't the same AT ALL. Those herders didn't have bullets in their [expletive]ing skulls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why search him? Just stand there with the gun pointed on the kid on the ground as you dial the phone. I highly doubt the kid is a crazy adamantium skeletoned superhero who will rise to battle after being shot in the face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why search him? Just stand there with the gun pointed on the kid on the ground as you dial the phone. I highly doubt the kid is a crazy adamantium skeletoned superhero who will rise to battle after being shot in the face.

Lmao...Yeah seriously

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why search him? Just stand there with the gun pointed on the kid on the ground as you dial the phone. I highly doubt the kid is a crazy adamantium skeletoned superhero who will rise to battle after being shot in the face.

 

It's easy to say when you're not in that situation. There's this little thing called........ adrenalin. It changes the way you act. You don't always think clearly in situations like that.

 

The funniest part about this, is that punk kids family is suing for damages. :lol: . Give me a [expletive]ing break. Your punk kid got everything he deserved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After the pharmacist shot the robber, he chased the other guy out of the store, walked past the wounded robber, reloaded his gun, then shot the dude to death...that goes way beyond simply defending yourself. The proper move would have been to run out of the store and call the cops while the man was incapacitated on the floor with a bullet in his brain. There was no threat after the first shot, and the pharmacist himself proved that as he walked by him and took time to reload the gun before firing off.

 

And no, that case isn't the same AT ALL. Those herders didn't have bullets in their [expletive]ing skulls.

 

In that case, they had a chance to remove the threat, but they did not, and multiple Navy Seals were killed in the process. In the pharmacist's case, he removed the threat, and lived to tell the tale. Even if the kid has a bullet in his head, like he deserved, that doesn't mean the threat is removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...